Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add functions to add a node operator #12906

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 25, 2024
Merged

Add functions to add a node operator #12906

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 25, 2024

Conversation

cds95
Copy link
Contributor

@cds95 cds95 commented Apr 20, 2024

No description provided.

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

I see you updated files related to contracts. Please run pnpm changeset in the contracts directory to add a changeset.

@cds95 cds95 marked this pull request as ready for review April 20, 2024 03:34
@cds95 cds95 changed the title WIP: Add functions to add a node operator Add functions to add a node operator Apr 20, 2024
cds95
cds95 commented Apr 20, 2024
View reviewed changes
contracts/src/v0.8/keystone/interfaces/ICapabilityRegistry.sol Outdated
/// @param admin The address of the admin that can manage the node
/// operator
/// @param name The human readable name of the node operator
function addNodeOperator(address admin, string calldata name) external;
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm thinking of updating this function signature to accept an array of NodeOperator structs so that multiple node operators can be added in a single transaction. This may be easier if we remove the id field from the NodeOperator struct.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm thinking of updating this function signature to accept an array of NodeOperator structs so that multiple node operators can be added in a single transaction.

👍 makes sense.

This may be easier if we remove the id field from the NodeOperator struct.

I'm not sure I understand how this makes it easier. Could you elaborate?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So keeping the id field would mean that we need to define a new struct

struct NodeOperatorArgs {
   address admin;
   string name;
}

which we then pass in to the addNodeOperators(NodeOperatorArgs[] calldata nodeOperators) function as we only want the admin and name fields. I guess the alternative would be to just pass in NodeOperator instances with the id field but just ignore it.

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

DeividasK
DeividasK previously approved these changes Apr 22, 2024
View reviewed changes
@cds95 cds95 force-pushed the KS-130/implement-add-node-operators-to-capability-registry branch from 34b8380 to 71e2bda Compare April 23, 2024 07:05
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

1 similar comment
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

@cds95 cds95 force-pushed the KS-130/implement-add-node-operators-to-capability-registry branch from d5b2d47 to ffd96ef Compare April 23, 2024 07:28
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

@cds95 cds95 force-pushed the KS-130/implement-add-node-operators-to-capability-registry branch from 3b5a160 to 92990b9 Compare April 24, 2024 08:45
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

1 similar comment
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

@cds95 cds95 force-pushed the KS-130/implement-add-node-operators-to-capability-registry branch from 92990b9 to 9b6ac59 Compare April 25, 2024 13:55
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

Go solidity wrappers are out-of-date, regenerate them via the make wrappers-all command

@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

I see you updated files related to core. Please run pnpm changeset in the root directory to add a changeset as well as in the text include at least one of the following tags:

  • #added For any new functionality added.
  • #breaking_change For any functionality that requires manual action for the node to boot.
  • #bugfix For bug fixes.
  • #changed For any change to the existing functionality.
  • #db_update For any feature that introduces updates to database schema.
  • #deprecation_notice For any upcoming deprecation functionality.
  • #internal For changesets that need to be excluded from the final changelog.
  • #nops For any feature that is NOP facing and needs to be in the official Release Notes for the release.
  • #removed For any functionality/config that is removed.
  • #updated For any functionality that is updated.
  • #wip For any change that is not ready yet and external communication about it should be held off till it is feature complete.

@cds95 cds95 force-pushed the KS-130/implement-add-node-operators-to-capability-registry branch from c346a9b to 65f986d Compare April 25, 2024 15:37
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

I see you added a changeset file but it does not contain a tag. Please edit the text include at least one of the following tags:

  • #added For any new functionality added.
  • #breaking_change For any functionality that requires manual action for the node to boot.
  • #bugfix For bug fixes.
  • #changed For any change to the existing functionality.
  • #db_update For any feature that introduces updates to database schema.
  • #deprecation_notice For any upcoming deprecation functionality.
  • #internal For changesets that need to be excluded from the final changelog.
  • #nops For any feature that is NOP facing and needs to be in the official Release Notes for the release.
  • #removed For any functionality/config that is removed.
  • #updated For any functionality that is updated.
  • #wip For any change that is not ready yet and external communication about it should be held off till it is feature complete.

@cds95 cds95 force-pushed the KS-130/implement-add-node-operators-to-capability-registry branch from 65f986d to eaaaad4 Compare April 25, 2024 15:42
@cl-sonarqube-production
Copy link

Quality Gate passed Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Fixed issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
No data about Duplication

See analysis details on SonarQube

@DeividasK DeividasK added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 25, 2024
Merged via the queue into develop with commit 365c38b Apr 25, 2024
106 checks passed
@DeividasK DeividasK deleted the KS-130/implement-add-node-operators-to-capability-registry branch April 25, 2024 16:53
This was referenced Apr 25, 2024
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@DeividasK DeividasK DeividasK approved these changes

@archseer archseer Awaiting requested review from archseer archseer is a code owner

@bolekk bolekk Awaiting requested review from bolekk bolekk is a code owner

@patrick-dowell patrick-dowell Awaiting requested review from patrick-dowell patrick-dowell is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@cds95 @DeividasK